Last May while researching stories for blog entries, I came across the NYDailyNews.com report "Former New York Yankee Jim Leyritz settles civil suit stemming from fatal 2007 car accident".
In advance of his trial on manslaughter charges, Mr. Leyritz, as a person accused of criminal charges arising from the same event, settled with the living victims of his alleged wrongdoing.
It was alleged that Leyritz, driving drunk in Florida, on December 28, 2007, ran a red light and plowed into a vehicle containing Fredia Ann Veitch, a 30 year-old mother of two, killing her.
The Veitch family settled for $350,000; $250,000 paid by Leyritz's insurance company, and $100,000 payable at $1,000 per month for 100 months, from his big-league pension.
The civil suit specified that the settlement was without any admission of liability on Leyritz's part.
On December 2, 2010, the Associated Press reported that he was acquitted of DUI manslaughter charges in November, as the jury at criminal trial decided that he didn't run a red light and cause a crash "Ex-Yankee Leyritz gets probation, fine in Fla. DUI" .
While it is elemental that the burden of proof at a criminal trial is tougher to prove than the burden in a civil trial, I was surprised at the result.
I thought that the civil matter was settled in anticipation of a felony criminal conviction, so that at time of sentencing, Mr. Leyritz's attorney could say something to the judge in mitigation of the crime, like: "Your Honor, my client is full of remorse due to what happened. He has accepted responsibility for his actions. Although money will not bring Ms. Veitch back, my client has already compensated her family as best as he can, and spared them the pain of trial, by settlement of the civil case."
Not having the benefit of more information concerning the manslaughter jury's finding of no criminal liability for a passed red light, we do not know how a civil jury would have viewed the facts at a civil wrongful death trial.
I would like to think, under the circumstances, that justice was served. Perhaps Mr. Leyritz's driving did not reach the recklessness required for manslaughter, but was significant enough causally for civil liability to attach.
No comments
